Minor works on a 30 year old install

[Deleted member 9648]

Because your working in an area thats notifiable, your working in a special location, and all works need to comply with current regs. As my edit above would you be happy replacing a shower with no RCD protection or suplementry bonding in a bathroom?

Straight like for like is maintenance.....not installation. If the shower complied with the regs when originally installed and nothing has changed there is no reason to upgrade anything for a like for like.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

agreed buts its a fine line, and where you draw it depends on person to person.. Non IP rated fittings in zone 1 !! Yep crack on


Edit, Im off for beer,, anyone want one?

Who said anything about non IP???.....and mines a guiness Please:drool5:

.........

 

[Smart Sparks]

All light fittings are going to be standard pendant or bayonet, he wants them replaced as they are a lovely yellow colour. all like for like and class 2. I thought an upgrade of the supp bonding would be required but what was the regs 30 years ago? I don't remember I was advised that as long as my work is to standard and my actions didn't reduce the effectiveness of the system then no need for major upgrades, grey area occurs in special location , before 17th I would be supp bonding.

 

[BPW]

I'd agree with what's already been said, if it is like-for-like it's all good, i would advise on issues.

 

[Smart Sparks]

Thanks all, I never quite got the shower analogy, it has no relevance to a light fitting, nether less advice welcome, thank you.

 

[Geoffsd]

Thanks all, I never quite got the shower analogy, it has no relevance to a light fitting, nether less advice welcome, thank you.

It's exactly the same.

Replacements are not notifiable even in a bathroom.


Look at it another way.

Would you refuse to fit new light or even a light switch because the customer refuses to have unnecessary work done?

You cannot say that supplementary bonding is required, let alone must be done, without testing.

 

[Geoffsd]

You seem a bit mixed up

All light fittings are going to be standard pendant or bayonet, he wants them replaced as they are a lovely yellow colour. all like for like and class 2.

Are pendants Class 2?

I thought an upgrade of the supp bonding would be required but what was the regs 30 years ago? I don't remember

It may not require supplementary bonding.
Nothing to do with replacing a light and switch, though.

I was advised that as long as my work is to standard and my actions didn't reduce the effectiveness of the system then no need for major upgrades,

If, by effectiveness, you mean safety then yes?
If your work reduces the safety of the installation it should not be done.

grey area occurs in special location

No they don't.

, before 17th I would be supp bonding.

Even if it is not required and could introduce a hazard???


How much would you expect a customer to pay so that you could replace one light and switch?

 

[Guest55]

How much would you expect a customer to pay so that you could replace one light and switch?

it amazes me how some of the installers on here ever win work when they cant see past replacing the CU for virtually any job.

 

[kingeri]

The only thing I am very strict on on any job (even 'like for like') is main bonding.....that's the cornerstone of safe electrics, so I'd just have a quick test of that but otherwise just replace the fittings. Just make sure you're specific on your certs. No harm in recommending a upgrade to include RCD protection, but it's not down to you to insist on it.

 

[Octopus]

Mate, this is like for like repairs. I wouldn't even bother with any paperwork other than an invoice.

 

[brman]

The only thing I am very strict on on any job (even 'like for like') is main bonding.....that's the cornerstone of safe electrics, so I'd just have a quick test of that but otherwise just replace the fittings. Just make sure you're specific on your certs. No harm in recommending a upgrade to include RCD protection, but it's not down to you to insist on it.

would you really insist on adding bonding if asked to change a light switch? or are you just saying you will check it and recommend (but not insist) on an upgrade?

 

[MDJ]

Lets hope a neighbour doesn't want a lamp replacing in an outide light, a new board change and LABC Notification may be required :21:

 

[Edd]

Simple question about the above thread. You are asked to fit a nice brass fitting in the lounge, your gona get £60 you remove the light and find no earth..... But your just replacing a light!!! carry on and take the money???? now your asked to replace a light in a bathroom, but again it will not be to the 17th.. Its your arse on the line again!! Take the money ???? see my posts above...

 

[Edd]

Straight like for like is maintenance.....not installation. If the shower complied with the regs when originally installed and nothing has changed there is no reason to upgrade anything for a like for like.

so your nice new fitting is as it was before not sutable for the enviroment, but hey, your just replacing like for like!!!! good luck when that bite you in the arse. as above... gu10s in zone 1,, but hey it was ok before!!!

I wana replace all the down lighters in my bathroom, they all rusted and hanging out I think they are 230v, and i cant see any trans formers.... please replace these i will pay but hey its just a replacement like for like isnt it, so you dont have to worry...
I really enjoy my super bright lights why i shower...

 

[brman]

Simple question about the above thread. You are asked to fit a nice brass fitting in the lounge, your gona get £60 you remove the light and find no earth..... But your just replacing a light!!! carry on and take the money???? now your asked to replace a light in a bathroom, but again it will not be to the 17th.. Its your arse on the line again!! Take the money ???? see my posts above...

don't think that is what is being suggested. If you were fitting a class II then no problem, keep going but if the customer wanted a class 1 fitted I'd make the quote conditional on there being a cpc in there........